Bug stamp-out list for Nov 7 06:00 (CST)
Total number of release-critical bugs: 677
Number that will disappear after removing packages marked [REMOVE]: 46
Number that have a patch: 84
Number that have a fix prepared and waiting to upload: 34
Number that are being ignored: 16
Number on packages
Bonjour,
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été corrigé dans le paquet sid ?
Merci
--
Thomas Labourdette
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 11:59, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Bonjour,
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été corrigé dans le paquet sid ?
Différentes façons de le savoir :
http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html
Le Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:20:27PM +0100, Michel Grentzinger écrivait:
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 11:59, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été corrigé dans le paquet sid ?
Différentes façons de le savoir :
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 17:10, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Le Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:20:27PM +0100, Michel Grentzinger écrivait:
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 11:59, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été
Le Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:34:07PM +0100, Michel Grentzinger écrivait:
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 11:59, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été corrigé dans le paquet sid ?
Je ne connais pas les détails
Le Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:34:07PM +0100, Michel Grentzinger écrivait:
Le Vendredi 7 Novembre 2003 11:59, Thomas Labourdette a écrit :
Dans le paquet CVS 1.12.1-7 (sarge) il manque le script
cvs-makerepos. Est-ce que ça été corrigé dans le paquet sid ?
Je ne connais pas les détails
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 19:23, Jonathan Oxer wrote:
* Package name: gtkscintilla2
Description : Gtk-2 wrappers for the Scintilla source editing components
GTK+ is spelled with all CAPS and a + at the end. Also, I think you
can omit the -2 - it is implied in the dependencies. (Also, I
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003, John Belmonte wrote:
However in your package, assuming it is compiling GPL'd modules and
including them in the library, is producing an object file governed by
the terms of the GPL. Therefore your license field should read only GPL.
Last time I checked we didn't have
braze polyploidy accordions anabaptist testamentary tenebrous brains achiever mayst midweek booky televisions midget crabs talk blurted angora exacter meanest bookings messiahs polygonal mattress augustus illnesses icon say merciless talus medics $RANDO
MIZE miasma thanking pornographic taxicabs
reopen 217265
thanks
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 00:18, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
* New upstream release (CVS snapshot)
- Now uses STABLE branch - closes: #217265
No, please, use only *released* versions. I have been hurt many times by
AbiWord being broken because of something which
I'm trying to figure out the reason why orbit2 is blocked from testing,
see
http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=orbit2
I understand the problem in principle: there is/are some package/s that
needs the older version of orbit2, and the other uninstallable
packages depend on these.
severity 217265 wishlist
thanks
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joe Drew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 00:18, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
* New upstream release (CVS snapshot)
- Now uses STABLE branch - closes: #217265
No, please, use only *released* versions. I
Scripsit Yven Johannes Leist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, I for one would love to see a security announcement one day, which
contains something like:
All users running the standard Debian kernel are not affected, since the
special security features the Debian kernel contains prevent the
#include hallo.h
* GOTO Masanori [Fri, Nov 07 2003, 01:43:15PM]:
Sorry, users will still ask. They always ask. Users still think that
updating /usr/include/linux to point to /usr/src/linux/include/linux is the
right thing to do.
And then, which package does provide /usr/src/linux
Joe Buck wrote, in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00376.html:
The GPL requires that anyone who receives the work also either receives
the source for the work (the preferred form for making changes), or...
Not quite; it requires that anyone *given* the work is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Coin,
Gnusound is using OSS only.
Yet, afaik there's no plan to add Alsa/Esd/Arts/... support.
The included TODO file reads that the upstream author is likely to fix
many technical and cosmetic bug before adding big features.
Duck
-BEGIN PGP
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 10:24:05PM -0800, Joe Buck wrote:
I'm trying to figure out the reason why orbit2 is blocked from testing,
see
http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=orbit2
I understand the problem in principle: there is/are some package/s that
needs the older version of
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from asking this again and again.
system-headers-linux is a bit vague and without
Jonathan Oxer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 10:50, Martin Pitt wrote:
But isn't rsync supposed to do this? I don't know exactly how
efficiently it detects and compresses binary differences, but it
definitely does it and not too bad. With rsync, you get both the easy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Coin,
You'r right, Powerful is not adequate, i just took author's descriptionw
without taking care of it.
I asked the author if it was possible to use it without gnome support and he
said it was not, so i suggest this :
s/Powerful /gnome /
The test incorrectly assumes that thread stacks are executable is not
equivalent to thread stacks are non-executable. And there's no conflict
in what i say above.
ok, i was quoting too much and you interpreted the wrong part. the bit
i was referring to is this:
I suspect we both agree that
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 12:15:06PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I suspect we both agree that it's desirable to have thread stacks
| non-executable as well.
|
| on one hand you acknowledge that it's better to have non-exec thread
| stacks but on the other hand you argued that
|
| it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This ITP was badly written as it was my first attempt, sorry.
Here is a better one with an improved Description :
* Package name: ircd-ptlink
Version : 2.23.6
Upstream Author : PTlink Coders team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL or Web page :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Coin,
This ITP was badly written as it was my first attempt, sorry.
Here is a better one with an improved Description :
* Package name: ircd-ptlink
Version : 6.16.1
Upstream Author : PTlink Coders team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL or Web
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: sound-icons
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Brailcom, o.p.s. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.freebsoft.org/pub/projects/sound-icons/
* License : GPL
Description : Sounds to be used for event
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 20:04:54 +1100
Source: vile
Binary: xvile vile-filters vile vile-common
Architecture: all i386 powerpc source sparc
Version: 9.4-c1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 09:13:46 -0200
Michelle Ribeiro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Em Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:42:03 +0100
Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
Hi,
Hmm, yes. Anyone speak Portuguese? :-)
We are talking in english in the list. Fell free to join us.
Hi
Me too! Nice to
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: linux
Version : 2.4.22
Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] and others, see:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
* URL : http://www.kernel.org/
* License : GPL
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from
Peter Palfrader wrote:
Last time I checked we didn't have License fields, so this discussion is
pointless.
Indeed, I was imagining some other world. In any case, I'd assume that
the license field of the ITP is going to reflect the contents of the
package copyright file.
--
http:// if ile.o
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 02:37:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
* Package name: linux
Version : 2.4.22
Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] and others, see:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
* URL :
One of my packages just failed to build on m68k with the message:
E: dpkg was interrupted, you must manually run 'dpkg --configure -a' to correct
the problem.
I noticed that a couple of other packages on this arch have also just
failed to build with the same message. Does the buildd
Hi!
I think you haven't read my previous mail:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00204.html
Please have a look at it, my response below assumes you did.
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:56:38AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
As an academic exercise this is
Op vr 07-11-2003, om 17:21 schreef Paul Telford:
One of my packages just failed to build on m68k with the message:
E: dpkg was interrupted, you must manually run 'dpkg --configure -a' to
correct the problem.
That's kullervo.
I noticed that a couple of other packages on this arch have
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:56:38AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
As an academic exercise this is fine and dandy, but having two
competing packagings of the same _basic_ component can't do us any
good.
This isn't a competing package. As I said
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:22:08PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[another version of the linux-kernel in tha archive]
I think you haven't read my previous mail:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00204.html
Please have a look at it, my response below assumes
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or
Hello,
is there any reason why packages, which are already accepted and now are
in incoming.d.o are not moving to the archives?
for example http://incoming.debian.org/wget_1.9-1_m68k.deb is there
since 2003-11-04.
Other packages like xmule or webmin are having the same problem.
Whats the
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Noèl Köthe wrote:
Hello,
is there any reason why packages, which are already accepted and now are
in incoming.d.o are not moving to the archives?
for example http://incoming.debian.org/wget_1.9-1_m68k.deb is there
since 2003-11-04.
Other packages like xmule or webmin
Noèl Köthe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
is there any reason why packages, which are already accepted and now are
in incoming.d.o are not moving to the archives?
for example http://incoming.debian.org/wget_1.9-1_m68k.deb is there
since 2003-11-04.
Other packages like xmule or webmin are having
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Noèl Köthe wrote:
is there any reason why packages, which are already accepted and now are
in incoming.d.o are not moving to the archives?
for example http://incoming.debian.org/wget_1.9-1_m68k.deb is there
since 2003-11-04.
That's because wget starts with w.
Other
Package: wnpp
Version: unavailable; reported 2003-11-07
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: multi-aterm
Version : 0.0.5
Upstream Author : Alexis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* URL : http://www.materm.tuxfamily.org/materm.html
* License : GPL
Description : X terminal
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Michael Poole wrote:
As a user, I have never been confused by Debian's normal Linux
kernel packages. What specific benefits would your proposed package
offer?
At least, the ability to do
apt-get source linux
as it should always have been.
I think it's time we put an
[ Please keep CC to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:57:28AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
Having options for the sake of having options is, frankly, a hideously
stupid design doctrine. Whose life will this package make easier? As
a user, I have never been confused by Debian's
#include hallo.h
* Robert Millan [Fri, Nov 07 2003, 02:37:35PM]:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: linux
Version : 2.4.22
Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] and others, see:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
*
Hi Eduard,
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 05:58:36PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
Before you do any such things, please ask whether anybody has more
important things to change on the kernel packagement. And, believe me,
there are ideas for the post-Herbert era.
And now make you ready for the
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 06:12:20PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
quote
a good choice for the power user, who typicaly wants to re-compile Linux
perself, apply per's own set of patches, etc. However, I feel that an option
for newbie users to install forget just like we do for every Debian
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:19:23PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
[ Please keep CC to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 11:57:28AM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
Having options for the sake of having options is, frankly, a hideously
stupid design doctrine. Whose life will this
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are (at least) the following benefits:
- Easy understanding of the package. Developers looking at the package will
find every piece in the place Debian packages normaly put it. The binaries
are in .deb, pristine upstream sources are in
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:00:26PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
You have not obsoleted any of the kernel patch packages.
It's not my intention to obsolete anything, but whenever I have to add my own
patches they will be in debian/patches directory where people expect them to
be, not in a
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:32:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:00:26PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Have you perhaps noticed that the kernels from every architecture build
from different source packages? Why don't you spend a little time
working out why this
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:32:02PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
Have you perhaps noticed that the kernels from every architecture build
from different source packages? Why don't you spend a little time
working out why this is so, what the issues are with trying to do it
from one package,
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from asking
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:19:20PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
This is a meaningless observation in the context of how the package
should be structured.
You said before:
I have never been confused by Debian's \normal\ Linux kernel packages.
I understand the confusion in the current
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, GOTO Masanori wrote:
And then, which package does provide /usr/src/linux directory?
none should.
-Original Message-From: Kerri Bowman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003
2:48 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Half Priced
Viagra
-Original Message-
From: Wagner,Kirby,GREENWICH,SAP Team
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:10 AM
To: Winters,John,GREENWICH,Information Services
Cc: Halliday,Steve,GREENWICH,Information Services
Subject: RE: Inventory Count Test
John,
Please e-mail below
-Original Message-
From: Bryant,Susan,GREENWICH,Information Services
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 1:24 PM
To: Winters,John,GREENWICH,Information Services
Subject: RE: Resolved Deduction Report
Thanks for confirming. I think we will just leave it lie unless
-Original Message-
From: Fine,Paul,GREENWICH,Information Systems
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 4:31 PM
To: Winters,John,GREENWICH,Information Services;
Moffa,Robert,GREENWICH,Information Services
Cc: Daley,Tom,GREENWICH,Information Services
Subject: RE: Invalid SAPOFFICE user ID in
-Original Message-
From: Melody,Thomas,GREENWICH,Information Services
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 3:09 PM
To: Winters,John,GREENWICH,Information Services
Cc: Fine,Paul,GREENWICH,Information Systems
Subject: FW: rice doc status
John,
Was this
-Original Message-
From: Fine,Paul,GREENWICH,Information Systems
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 9:28 AM
To: Winters,John,GREENWICH,Information Services;
Melody,Thomas,GREENWICH,Information Services
Subject: RE: rice doc
I thought this was standard
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:35:52PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I haven't noticed, so thanks for pointing this out. The fix is trivial, btw.
If you think that, then you don't understand why they are all built
separately.
I don't need to understand that.
They all require different
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:18:37PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:35:52PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I haven't noticed, so thanks for pointing this out. The fix is trivial,
btw.
If you think that, then you don't understand why they are all built
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:35:54PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
I haven't noticed, so thanks for pointing this out. The fix is trivial, btw.
No, the fix is a fucking huge amount of work, which is why nobody has
done it before, even for the upstream kernel.
Appliing patches dinamicaly
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:22:27PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:18:37PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
If you think that, then you don't understand why they are all built
separately.
I don't need to understand that.
You don't need to understand the problem
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:48:06PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:22:27PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:18:37PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
If you think that, then you don't understand why they are all built
separately.
I don't
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:49:59PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I wouldn't. I'm going to track the latest minor version, just like the rest
of Debian packages do.
And then you won't build on any architecture unless the architecture
moves to that kernel version. This has been known
Hi All,
I'm updating the docbook-simple package from V1.0cr2 to V1.0. Since
1.0cr2 1.0, I'm not sure how to handle the situation.
Policy the Developers Reference imply that I upload V1.0 and file a
bug against ftp.debian.org to have V1.0CR2 removed from the
archive. This seems like an odd way
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:48:06PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
Then how do you suggest maintaining a kernel 2.4.20 for one
architecture and a 2.4.22 for another architecture, when you can't even
test on either of them?
I wouldn't. I'm going to track the latest minor version, just like
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:22:27PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Then how do you suggest maintaining a kernel 2.4.20 for one
architecture and a 2.4.22 for another architecture, when you can't even
test on either of them? And how do you expect to ever upgrade the
result without duplicating
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:57:54PM -0500, Mark Johnson wrote:
Hi All,
I'm updating the docbook-simple package from V1.0cr2 to V1.0. Since
1.0cr2 1.0, I'm not sure how to handle the situation.
Policy the Developers Reference imply that I upload V1.0 and file a
bug against ftp.debian.org
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:59:51PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:48:06PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
Then how do you suggest maintaining a kernel 2.4.20 for one
architecture and a 2.4.22 for another architecture, when you can't even
test on either of them?
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
- Automatical major updates (the x in 2.x.y). When 2.6 is suitable to be
the default version, a simple change in -defaults package (ala
gcc) would enforce updating on all existing systems that use this
method. This prevents us from encountering
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:35:54PM +, Andrew Suffield wrote:
I haven't noticed, so thanks for pointing this out. The fix is trivial,
btw.
No, the fix is a fucking huge amount of work, which is why nobody has
done it before, even for the
:!
!
www.wztpy.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2003-11-08
Robert Millan wrote:
I wouldn't. I'm going to track the latest minor version, just like the rest
of Debian packages do.
You really, massively, hugely fail to understand the problem here. The
upstream kernel tree works on a small number of architectures. To deal
with this, several other
Mark Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm updating the docbook-simple package from V1.0cr2 to V1.0. Since
1.0cr2 1.0, I'm not sure how to handle the situation.
Policy the Developers Reference imply that I upload V1.0 and file a
bug against ftp.debian.org to have V1.0CR2 removed from the
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:55:25 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if you are virused, or if your sender has been spoofed, or
what. Anyway, you might want to look into this. You appear to be
spewing odd word documents people you don't know.
Jim Penny
-Original Message-
hello,
most of the debian kde packages start with a description, what KDE is. I am
not sure if it is a good idea to have such more geenric background info at
the beginning of a package description. I would suggest something like:
kuickshow:
--
KDE image/slideshow viewer
This package is part of
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:20:25PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 04:22:27PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Then how do you suggest maintaining a kernel 2.4.20 for one
architecture and a 2.4.22 for another architecture, when you can't even
test on either of
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:13:18PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
At least, the ability to do
apt-get source linux
as it should always have been.
I think it's time we put an end to this euphemism called the kernel
and start calling it by its proper name (if we refer to Linux, that is).
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: linux
Version : 2.4.22
Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] and others, see:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
* URL :
Andreas Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cu and- I would not use an epoch unless I was forced to,
ugly package versions go, epochs stay forever -reas
You know what, version numbers stay forever too. Well, they would
if it weren't for the epoch...
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is
On Nov 7, Mark Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I'm updating the docbook-simple package from V1.0cr2 to V1.0. Since
1.0cr2 1.0, I'm not sure how to handle the situation.
1.0.0 will do the trick, and I think that's cleaner than something like
1.0really.
--
Neil Roeth
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:37:16PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:00:00 +0200
Source: jspwiki
Binary: jspwiki
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.1.86-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Kalle Kivimaa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Kalle Kivimaa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 02:30:51 -0600
Source: pybliographer
Binary: pybliographer
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.1.93-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Chris Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Chris Lawrence [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:35:51 +0100
Source: nicotine
Binary: nicotine
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0.5-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Josselin Mouette [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:08:32 +0200
Source: cpu
Binary: cpu
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.4.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Guido Trotter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Guido Trotter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 07:38:06 +0100
Source: rep-gtk
Binary: rep-gtk-gnome rep-gtk
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.18-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Christian Marillat [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Christian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:07:17 +
Source: leafnode
Binary: leafnode
Architecture: source i386 powerpc
Version: 1.9.46.rel-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Mark Brown [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:30:49 +0100
Source: grub-installer
Binary: grub-installer
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.24
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Petter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:32:40 +0100
Source: lilo-installer
Binary: lilo-installer
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.23
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Install System Team [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Petter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:24:14 +0100
Source: tilp
Binary: tilp
Architecture: source i386
Version: 6.68-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Julien BLACHE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 20:04:54 +1100
Source: vile
Binary: xvile vile-filters vile vile-common
Architecture: all i386 powerpc source sparc
Version: 9.4-c1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Brendan O'Dea [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 20:42:48 +1100
Source: bbppp
Binary: bbppp
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.2.3-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Andrew Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 20:44:48 +1100
Source: bbtime
Binary: bbtime
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.1.5-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Andrew Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:46:22 +0100
Source: mixmaster
Binary: mixmaster
Architecture: source i386
Version: 3.0a9-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Peter Palfrader [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Peter Palfrader [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:15:36 +0100
Source: xmem
Binary: xmem
Architecture: source powerpc
Version: 1.20-19
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: David N. Welton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: David N. Welton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
